Philosophical Issues And Questions

Question 1

Describe Swinburne’s cumulative argument

Answer 1

• when putting all the logical arguments for the existence of God together, they make a cumulative case for God’s existence
• this makes more sense than any alternative hypothesis

Question 2

Give the name of the scholar who criticised Swinburne’s argument and how.

Answer 2

• Anthony Flew - 10 leaky buckets
• Argues that each argument within the cumulative case has flaws and so by bringing them all together , one decreases the validity of the argument

Question 3

Describe Pascal’s Wager

Answer 3

• Pascal thought that evidence cannot settle the question of whether God exists,
• he proposes that you should believe in God rather than risk the disastrous consequences in the afterlife

Question 4

Is Pascal’s wager convincing 1/1

Answer 4

yes: in his mind there is no negative consuqence in believing in God
no: it does not fully include other religions and beliefs , as he simplifies the idea that faith=reward which is not a universal thought

Question 5

Define A posteriori knowledge

Answer 5

• A type of argument based on experience of the world.
• It uses empirical facts (evidence from the 5 senses) and draws conclusions from them.

Question 6

Define A priori knowledge

Answer 6

• A type of argument independent of experience
• reaches a logically necessary conclusion

Question 7

What is a deductive argument?

Answer 7

• a logically necessary statement which consists of a set of premises and a conclusion which can’t be disputed

Question 8

what is an inductive argument?

Answer 8

• argument which leads to probable conclusions by making generalisations from experience of particular examples

Question 9

Give two strengths of an a priori argument

Answer 9

1. less susceptible to changes in empirical data. This makes them **consistent and universally applicable **regardless of external observations.
2. Certainty and Necessity: These arguments aim to establish truths that are necessarily true. If the premises are logically sound, the conclusions are unavoidable and not subject to doubt.

Question 10

give two weaknesses of a priori argument

Answer 10

-Limited Applicability: based on logic rather than sensory experience, they may not address practical or real-world phenomena effectively.
- depends on whether one believes the premises are analytically true

Question 11

give two strengths of a posteriori argument

Answer 11

• relies on experience that may be universal or testable
• does not demand that we accept definitions as fixed

Question 12

give two weaknesses of a posteriori argument

Answer 12

• may depend on variable or misunderstood experience
• leads to probability rather than proof

Question 13

What is the design argument?

Answer 13

• is a posteriori , inductive argument for the existence of God based on apparent evidence of deliberate design in the natural or physical world.
• due to world’s apparent order, regularity and purpose.
• Socrates encapsulated this , saying “With such signs of forethought in the design of living creatures, can you doubt they are works of design?

Question 14

Give the Socrates quote in support for the design argument

Answer 14

’ with such signs of forethought in the design of living creatures , can you doubt they are work of design’

Question 15

What is Deism?

Answer 15

• a philosophical position that rejects religious scriptures and argues that reason and observation is evidence of a creator
• believe in a God who created the world but who is no longer interested in sustaining it

Question 16

Describe the two forms of the design argument
Give the key scholars related to each

Answer 16

• argument from design: St Thomas Aquinas, William Paley
• argument to design : Richard Swinburne, F R Tennant

Question 17

Give the premises involved in the argument from design

Answer 17

1.From observation, it is possible to see that the universe has order, regularity and purpose.
2.The complexity of the universe shows evidence of design.
3. Such design implies an intelligent designer.
4. The only designer able to design something so complex as the universe is God.
5.Therefore, God exists

Question 18

Give William Paley’s two arguments in support for the Design Argument

Answer 18

Design qua purpose: the universe was designed to fulfill a purpose
Design qua regularity: the universe behaves according to some order

Question 19

Give the analogy of the eye relating to the design argument

as proposed by Paley

Answer 19

• The eye is fitted together in such a way that it is possible to see clearly.
• its complex parts serve the purpose of the whole
• Sight is the purpose.
• Paley argues for a Designing Creator – God - who designs things to fit their purpose.

Question 20

Give William Paley’s analogy of the WatchMaker

Answer 20

• Paley uses a watchmaker analogy which posits that just as our observation of a watch , with its intricate design and functional purpose , leads to an ‘inference (…) that the watch must have had a maker’ ( William Paley) , so too does the complexity and order observable in the universe , imply the existence of God ,

Question 21

Describe Paley’s Second Argument

Answer 21

• there is evidence of design in the order and regularity of the universe.
• He used evidence of astronomy and Isaac Newton’s laws of motion and gravity to prove design in the universe

Question 22

How does the Analogy of the Watchmaker relate to the universe and God’s existence?

Answer 22

1. A watch has certain complex features, and they work together for a specific purpose).
2. Anything that exhibits these features must have been designed.
3. Therefore the watch has been designed by a designer.
   - The universe is like the watch in that it possesses the same features, except on a far more wondrous scale.
   - Therefore, the universe, like the watch, has been designed, except by a wondrous universe maker – God.

Question 23

Give the quote said by Brown (20th C) that supports William Paley’s argument

(Design qua purpose)

Answer 23

• He argued that the ozone layer’s purpose, which is to filter out the ultraviolet ray to protect life, could not have happened by chance.
• ‘A wall which prevents death to every living thing gives every evidence of a plan.’

Question 24

Give William Paley’s quote related to Design qua regularity and explain

Answer 24

’ if the attracting forces had varied … great destruction and confusion would have taken place’
- even a slight difference or irregularity within the system of the universe would mean there would be chaos instead of order.

Question 25

Give John Wisdom’s Parable of the Gardener

Answer 25

• A garden shows evidence of a gardener because of the order and the regularity in the arrangement of flowers
• Similar to how there is order and regularity evident in the universe, for example, in the rotation of the planets and the natural laws (Newton).
• evident of a designer of this world

Question 26

Describe Aquinas 5th Way.

give its premises

Answer 26

In Summa Theologica, Aquinas argues:
- there is benefical order in the universe
- this is not by chance
- objects do not have intellifence to work towards a purpose
- they must be directed by an intelligent being
- this intelligent being is God

Question 27

Describe Aquinas’ Archer Analogy. Give quote.

Answer 27

• An arrow, an unintelligent object, cannot achieve its end goal, of hitting the target without something intelligent guiding it.
• Therefore, the archer (the intelligent being) has to direct the arrow to fulfil its end goal of hitting the target.
• ‘as the arrow is directed by the archer’

Question 28

Give the names of scholars who criticise the Design Argument

Answer 28

• David Hume
• Laplacé
• Richard Dawkins

Question 29

Summarise Hume’s criticisms

Answer 29

1. William Paley’s argument does not support the existence of the God of classical theism
2. The analogy anthropomorphises God
3. we have no experience of world making
4. Arguments from analogies are weak as the scale is too wide

Question 30

Give J.S. Mill critique of the Design Argument

Answer 30

• design in the world supported either the non-existence of God or not the God of classical-theism
• as there is evil and suffering in the world, God can not have these qualities as he would put an end to it.

Question 31

Give Kant’s critique against the design argument

Answer 31

• humans assume there is regularity order and purpose.
• humans impose design on the world but there is no certainty that it truly is

Question 32

Give R.Dawkins critique on the design argument

Answer 32

• supported Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selectionwhich he argues gives the appearance of design
• appearance of beauty in the world is random and by chance

Question 33

What is the Strong Anthropic principle?

give named scholar

Answer 33

• F.R Tennant argues that the universe was designed explicitly for the purpose of supporting human life

Question 34

What is the Weak Anthropic Principle?

Answer 34

• Certain complex conditions needed to be met for life to exist. If the universe were any different human life would not exist

Question 35

THINK RUM

Give F.R Tennant’s argument in favour of the existence of a designer

Answer 35

he believed that there were three reasons in favour of a divine designer:
- universe can be RATIONALLY understood , it is not chaotic
- it is UNLIKELY that this universe supports human life , and so the fact is done is evidential of a designer
- Humans existence and complexity is evidence enough

Question 36

Give the Aesthetic Argument for God’s existence. Include quote.

Answer 36

• Tennant argues that the universe and humans possess beauty and this is not necessary for survival.
• The theory of evolution does not explain this.
• ’ beauty seems to be superfluous and to have little survival value’

Question 37

Give the two parts of Swinburne’s modern cumulative argument for God’s existence

Answer 37

1. regularity of co-Prescence
2. regularities of succession

Question 38

Summarise Swinburne’s cumulative modern argument. Include quote

Answer 38

• He argued that evolution does not rule out the possibility of God as a designer and that they can co exist
• ’ i do not deny that science explains, but i postulate God to explain why science explains’

Question 39

Describe Swinburne’s regularity of co-Prescence argument

Answer 39

• reformulating Paley’s argument, Swinburne argues that God as a rational agent created nature and uses the analogy of machine which produces other machines
• regards the universe as being fine-tuned for life

Question 40

Describe Swinburne’s regularity of succession

Answer 40

• refers to temporal order e.g the laws of nature which remain constant and unchanging causing order in the universe.
• He argues that science tell us that these laws exist and what they are but not why
• only an intelligent being can explain this ; this being God

Question 41

Give Swinburne quote for the argument to design

link to Ockham’s razor

Answer 41

• ’ either the orderliness of the universe is where all explanation stops or we must postulate an agent of great power and knowledge .. simplest such agent is God’
• Swinburne deploys Ockham’s Razor ( simplest explanation is most often the correct one) arguing that it is more likely that God created the universe than it appearing by chance
• ’ do not multiply entities beyond necessity’

Question 42

Give six strengths of the Design Argument and its counter arguments

Answer 42

1. it is a posteriori and based on experience. We can find evidence in the world to support the premises of the DA and can be assessed.
   CA: Kant argues that we might be imposing design on the world.
2. Paley’s argument is logically sound. The use of the analogy makes it more comprehensible to us ; moves something from our experience to explain something beyond it.
3. Paley’s observations of regularity are supported by science (laws of gravity, laws of motion etc)
4. Argument is not incompatible with evolution and the Big Bang
5. Swinburne’s cumulative argument
6. The Aesthetic Argument
   CA: Dawkins argued that beauty and special skills enable us to appear attractive enough to potential mates and so beauty can be explained through evolution.
   R: does not account for human’s perception of beauty found in Art and Literature.

Question 43

Give the scientific criticisms and weaknesses of the design argument and their counters

Answer 43

scientific criticisms:
- inductive argument= offers probability not proof. Kant says , this method cannot lead to certainty.
- flaws with inductive reasoning - can be disproven with new data ; i.e evolutionary theory
- evolutionary theory supports chance rather than design. Paley’s analogy of the eye can be explained without reference to a designer. Evolution suggests that complex systems can be achieved through the slow process of random genetic mutations, supported by natural selection. There is no need for a designer.
CA: some of the features of the world cannot be explained by Darwin. Brown’s example of the ozone layer is not a product of ‘evolution.’ CA: But, arguably, the ozone layer is still just a matter of chance supporting a lack of design.

Question 44

Give the philosophical criticisms of the design argument and their counters.

Answer 44

philosophical criticisms:
- Hume’s criticisms i.e analogy is weak: more areas of disanalogy than analogy between watch and universe ; doesn’t support god of classical theism
- problem of induction. Inductive leap is made.
- Mill claims that a God would not design a world in which his creation suffer. J.S. Mill declared that if like effects have like causes, then the misery and pain in the world can only lead one to the conclusion that God is not good.
- anthromorphises God

Question 45

What is the cosmological argument?

Answer 45

• it is based on the observation that the universe cannot account for its own existence and so there must be causes that have their origin in the existence of God
• why is there something rather than nothing?

Question 46

Give the premises for Aquinas’ first way

Answer 46

• From experience an object has the potential to change , and so change is the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality
• Infinite regress is impossible
• There must be a first mover and this mover can not be moved : This is God

Question 47

Give the premises for Aquinas’ Second Way- the uncaused causer

Answer 47

• from experience we know that everything must have an efficient cause which is external to itself
• infinite regress ( chain of efficient causes going on infinitely) is impossible
• conclusion: there must be an ultimate efficient cause, caused by no other and this is God
• the uncaused causer

Question 48

Give the premises of Aquinas’ third way - necessary being

Answer 48

P1: From experience we know that there are things which are contingent.
P2: Contingent beings would not exist if there was nothing to bring them into existence
P3: As there are contingent beings existing now, there must be something non-contingent (or necessary) that brought about the first contingent beings.
C: This is God (necessarybeing)

Question 49

Give three of the roles of God ( ways which he can be understood)

Answer 49

1. Temporal first cause
2. Sustainer of motion , causation and existence
3. Explanation of why there is something rather than nothing

Question 50

Explain the idea of God as a Temporal first cause

Answer 50

a cause in fieri
- God begins the chain of causation
- He is a cause in fieri: He is required to begin the universe but not required to sustain it
- God is responsible for all causation
- God is uncaused

Question 51

Give a quote / analogy for A cause in fieri

Answer 51

a son ‘ does not require the continued existence of the father”
Palmer

Question 52

Describe the idea of God as A cause in esse . Give Palmer quote

Answer 52

• God is a cause necessary to sustain its effect , such as a hand causing a pen to write
• ” bestows and sustains existence through his inexhaustible power to be”
• If God were not to continue to exist , other causation would not continue

Question 53

Describe the idea of God as an explanation of why something exists rather than nothing

Answer 53

Leibnitz’s Principle of sufficient reason: there is a reason, known or unknown for everything. the universe demands an ultimate , sufficient explanation for its existence.
- Parfit: When one considers that things exists ; it can seem astonishing that anything exists at all” . The existence of the world demands an explanation - and only God can provide this.

Question 54

Give the background behind the Kalam Cosmological Argument

Answer 54

• Islamic in origin and dates back to about 850 CE
• it argues God as a temporal first cause
• main scholar is Lane Craig

Question 55

Outline the key premises of the Kalam Cosmological Argument

Answer 55

• whatever begins to exist has a cause
• the universe began to exist
• therefore the universe has a cause, assumed to be god
  From this Lane Craig, added :
• if the universe had a beginning , then this was either caused or uncaused
• either it is a natural occurrence or a choice
• as the rules of nature did not exist before the beginning of the universe it can not be a natural cause
• it must be a personal being who freely chose to create this world
• this must be God

Question 56

Give Hume and Russels Fallacy of composition criticism

Answer 56

• The error of falsely ascribing the properties of the parts of a whole to a whole
• Just because events in the universe has a cause , does not mean the universe itself has a cause

Question 57

Give Hume’s criticism regards to infinite regress

Answer 57

• infinite regress may be possible because Hume argues that theres no reason to suppose that the universe is not infinite .
• Reichenbach claims that if mathematicians are happy with infinity then philosophers should be too

Question 58

Give Hume’s criticism of a ‘ necessary being’

Answer 58

• the necessary being may not be the God of Classical theism
• the first cause need not be loving or powerful : Paul Edwards: even if true ‘ would not show that the first cause is all-powerful or all-good’ instead it demands an explanation for the universe , but not the particular characteristic of the explanation
• Hume claims ‘’ why may not the material universe be the necessarily existent being’’ Why does it have to be God?

Question 59

Give Hume’s criticism for Cause and Effect and a counter

Answer 59

• Hume argues that we are wrong in making a connection between cause and effect : The Problem of Induction
• The argument moves from specific instances to generalisations
• just because we observe the universe exists does not mean that there must be a cause.
• it is an inductive leap
  COUNTER:
• induction is the way humans reason. Even Hume’s argument is an inductive argument
• The CA is inductive, we can make a reasonable link between them if in experience A does cause B

Question 60

Give Russel’s criticism for Aquinas’ claim that the universe must have an explanation. Give counter

Answer 60

• the universe is a brute fact
• Russell believes the universe requires no explanation, therefore there is no need to posit the existence of God to explain it all.
• to say that the universe is simply a brute fact is to refuse to engage in the debate. Russel does not support or argue his point, he simply claims it

Question 61

Give Kant’s criticism of the cause and effect. Give a counter

Answer 61

• Kate states that “All out knowledge falls with the bounds of experience” that we cannot have knowledge of things that transcend our sense experience.
• the idea that every event must have a first cause only applies to the world of our sense experience and thus cannot be applied to something that transcends out sense experience.
  counter: humans constantly attempt to acquire knowledge that transcends out sense experience; science, an example of this.

Question 62

Give the strengths of the Cosmological Argument (5)

Answer 62

• Accessible Evidence: evidence is universal and can be checked to be true
• Intuitive Claim: Its claims of the impossibility of infinite regress fits out intuition
• Logical form of explanation: movement from evidence to explanation is logical and clear
• appeals to human desire for explanation: at the root of the argument is a desire to explain the existence of anything at all. appealing to human need
• rules out natural explanation: we need a purposeful explanation rather than just a mechanical

Question 63

Give the weaknesses of the Cosmological Argument (

Answer 63

• it is an inductive argument which only leads to probability and not proof
• infinite regress is not properly ruled out ( Reichenbach)
• says little about the nature of god
• If God does not have a cause, then why should the universe also not have a cause
• It makes unjustified claims: comparing causes within the world and outside the world erroneous. Comparison is fallacious.
• no proof that everything has a cause ( Hume): “ pop in and out of existence”

Question 64

What is the ontological argument?

Answer 64

• attempts to prove that God exists by showing that contained necessarily within the concept (idea) of God, is the idea of His existence and, from this assertion, that God must exist in reality and not simply as a concept in the mind.

Question 65

Is the ontological argument a deductive argument

Answer 65

• it is a deductive argument which guarantees God’s existence with absolute certainty.
• this is because deductive arguments lead to philosophical proofs rather than probabilities

Question 66

What is valid argument?

Answer 66

• a valid argument is one where there are no mistakes in logic
• not all these valid arguments are true
  example:
• The Eiffel Tower is in London, London is in England, therefore the Eiffel tower is in England

Question 67

What is a sound argument

Answer 67

• an argument where both the logic is correct and the premises are true.

Question 68

Compare an analytic and a synthetic statement. Which one is the Ontological Arguments?

Answer 68

• an analytic statement is true by definition alone. They are a priori statements.
• a synthetic statement can be either verified or falsified . They are a posteriori statements.
• Ontological argument is analytic as it claims to be true by definition alone. it reaches the conclusion of the existence of God based on the definition used in the premises

Question 69

Give Anselm’s First Ontological Argument. Give quote.

Answer 69

1. God is ‘ that than which nothing greater can be conceived’
2. It is greater to exist in the mind ( in intellectu ) and in reality (in re) than in the mind alone
3. Therefore the greatest possible being, God, must exist in the mind and in reality.

Question 71

How does Anselm use ‘ reductio ad absurdum’ in his argument.

Answer 71

• his method of reasoning aims to demonstrate the truth of something by reducing to absurdity, the very opposite of what the aim is
• the opposite is God’s non-existence is logically necessary.

Question 72

How does Anselm define God and what example does he give?

Answer 72

• For Anselm, existence is a necessary aspect of perfection as existence is greater than non-existence
• He places this alongside, omniscience, omnibenevolence, aseity & omnipotence
• he uses the analogy of a painter; a painter has the image of his final work in his mind but it cannot be said
  to exist until he has painted it. so existence in re is greater thaninintellectu

Question 73

What is Guanilo’s criticism of Anselm’s argument?

Answer 73

• He objected to Anselm’s move from
  premises 1 to premise 3
• he rejected this in ‘ On Behalf Of the Fool’

P1: Imagine the greatest possible island
P2: It is greater to exist in reality than merely in the imagination
P3: Therefore, the greatest possible island must exist in reality.

Question 74

What was Anselm’s response to Guanilo

Answer 74

• An island only exists continentally as their non-existence is a possibility whereas God is a necessary being
• An island can never possess maximalqualities

Question 75

Give Anselm’s Second Ontological Argument

Answer 75

P1: God is the greatest possible being
P2: A God who can be thought of existing (necessary) is greater than a God who can be thought of not existing ( A contingent being)
P3: Therefore the greatest possible being,
God must existnecessarily

Question 76

What is Kant’s criticism of
Anselm’s argument?

Answer 76

• Kant argues that a predicate must add a descriptive property and enrich our understanding of it
• Existence is not a predicate and
  Anselm falsely ascribes this to God.
• This falsifies one of the premises and thus the argumentfallsapart

Question 77

What is Russel’s criticism of
Anselm’s argument?

Answer 77

• Like Kant, Russel rejects the idea that existence as a predicate.
• To say something exists is to deny zero; he believes we should not be talking about existence as an attribute but as an instance
• he argues that Anselm uses existence as an attribute when in actuality it functionsasaninstance

Question 78

What is Descartes Ontological argument?

Answer 78

-

Question 79

What was Aquinas’ criticism of Anselm and Descartes’ argument?

Answer 79

• there is a transitional error in that understanding the meaning of God only means God exists in the mind, and this does not mean God exists in reality.
• he argued that God’s existence needs to be demonstrated a posteriori if the move from definition to realityistobemade.

Question 80

Give the strengths and their counter arguments for the Ontologicalargument

Answer 80

• As a deductive argument, it offers a philosophical proof rather than a probability. This makes it stronger than other inductive arguments for God’s existence.
  CA: But this relies on one accepting the premises as true.
• It is a valid argument as the conclusion logically stems from the premises.
  CA; Many argue that whilst valid, it is not sound as for a sound argument, not only do the premises have to lead to the conclusion but the premises have to be true. The premises of the ontological argument can be challenged. They are not unfalsifiable and so the argument is flawed.
• Its starting point is valid for both believer and atheist. The definition of God as ‘that than which nothing greater can be conceived’ is accepted by the atheist, even if the atheist denies that such a being exists. The atheist must have an understanding of God in order to be able to reject belief in God.
  CA; God has not always been conceived of in this way. For example, the Greek gods had weaknesses and sinned and in Hinduism, there is a pantheon of Gods. It is incorrect to state that all people agree on a definition of God.
  Second CA: In addition, Aquinas argued that there is a ‘transitional error’ in that understanding the meaning of God only means God exists in the mind, and this does not mean God exists in reality. God’s existence needs to be demonstrated a posteriori if the move from definition to reality is to be made.
  REBUTTAL: Anselm argued that God is different from anything else and as such, he is, by definition, not open to empirical proof. And, being beyond such proof if actually proof of his existence!

Question 81

Give the weaknesses and their counter arguments for the Ontological Argument

Answer 81

• Limitation of an a priori argument is that if one premise is shown to be inaccurate the whole argument falls to pieces. The first premise is possibly inaccurate (see CA for number 3 in strengths).
• Kant: He argues that stating that ‘God does not exist’ is not a contradiction, Unless we assume that an object exists in the first place, we cannot make contradictory statements about it.
  CA: Anselm is not so much saying that a denial of God is a contradiction. Rather, he is suggesting that the greatest conceivable being cannot exist merely in the mind. There is a different.
• Kant: Existence is not a predicate. If we add or take away existence from something, it does not change the definition. You cannot define God into existence.
  CA: Existence is a meaningful predicate when applied to an object which can be conceived of as existing or not existing. Anselm’s argument is about the real existence of the God which exists in the intellect.
• Russell: existence as a predicate is to misunderstand existence. Existence is mathematical – it is an instance, not an attribute.
• Hume criticized God’s aseity (Christian belief that God contains within himself the cause of himself – his logical necessity). Hume argues that existence can only ever be contingent. Anything that can be said to exist can also not exist.
  CA: God is unlike anything else – he is exempt from this argument.
• God’s characteristics are contradictory e.g. an Omnipotent God could create a stone he couldn’t lift.